oblem, Please let me know if any settings
> have helped to solve this problem.
>
> With regards,
>
> Babulal Satasiya
> Cisco System Inc.
> Sanjose, CA
>
>
> JNeuhoff wrote:
>>
>>> Do I remember correctly, that Apache and Tomcat are on the same mac
services doesn't change anythink. Tomcat is
> running and answer for simple "hello world" jsp pages but cannot answer to
> /manage/html.
>
> I patch windows with KB 931311 and it seems to work properly.
>
>
> JNeuhoff wrote:
>>
>> Has anybody successfu
Has anybody successfully managed to run Apache 2.0.59 and Tomcat 5.5.17 on
Windows 2003 on a real production server, and not just as a test system?
We are still experiencing frequent TCP Connections Aborted errors (err=53)
for no apparent reasons, and because of that our live server becomes
unres
e serves this kind of content, I'm reducind the
> tomcat's load in 90%.
>
> -Mensaje original-
> De: JNeuhoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviado el: jueves, 25 de enero de 2007 14:38
> Para: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Asunto: RE: mod_jk replacement?
>
Here is the continuation of the thread dump:
[2007-01-30 12:24:02] [info]at java.lang.Object.wait(Unknown Source)
[2007-01-30 12:24:02] [info]at
org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run(ThreadPool.java:656)
[2007-01-30 12:24:02] [info]- locked <0x09516170> (a
org.
We'll repeat the stresstest with subsequent threaddump tomorrow morning.
However, I just experienced the same TCP Connections aborted scenario on
another test server running the same web service ('/demo-e/servlet'), and I
managed to get a threaddump from there:
[2007-01-29 17:21:07] [info] Consol
As a followup from the
http://www.nabble.com/mod_jk-replacement--tf3050993.html I am still looking
for a working solution of the err=-53 (TCP Connection aborted) problem.
To summarize what is happening:
We have a Windows 2003 server (with Apache 2.0.59, mod_jk 1.2.20 and Tomcat
5.5.17).
It was
Have you inserted this into your web.xml?
10
Muneendra wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a little complicated issue with HttpSession timeout process. It
> goes like this.
>
> Lets says, my Web Application session timeout period is 5 minutes.
> I made a Http request to s
I just tried it with the mod_proxy and mod_proxy_http modules which are
indeed available for Apache 2.0.59, and it works fine connecting to backend
Tomcat web service using the http protocol and port 8080.
I only needed one line in Apache's configuration:
ProxyPass /ohpr/ http://localhost:8080/
o far.
J.Neuhoff
Rainer Jung-3 wrote:
>
> JNeuhoff schrieb:
>>> connection timeout on mod_jk side is in seconds, on tomcat side is in
>>> milliseconds. So Mladens suggestion had a missing trailing 0 to make the
>>> params on the two sides fit. I think he meant c
> Do I remember correctly, that Apache and Tomcat are on the same machine?
> Is there a firewall on this machine?
They are both on the same machine. Apache is listening to a dedicated
IP-address, on port 80, while Tomcat is configured to using localhost, and
listens to port 8080 (http) and 8009 (
> connection timeout on mod_jk side is in seconds, on tomcat side is in
> milliseconds. So Mladens suggestion had a missing trailing 0 to make the
> params on the two sides fit. I think he meant connectionTimeout=60
> to make it fit the 600 on the mod_jk side.
Thanks, you are right, there was
> Increase the connection pool from 10 to 50 and see what happens.
Which one? The connection_pool_minsize or connection_pool_size? Our
ThreadsPerChild is currently set to 250, and if I understand the
documentation correctly, the default for connection_pool_size should be set
to the same value, th
> Whenever you have connection pool setup
> in mod_jk it means you don't have constant connections
> any more. The connection pool will maintain the
> connections and close them by some rule (size).
> Now, having that you *must* have connectionTimeout="6"
> in server.xml for the AJP conne
Thank for your explanations.
> I've read all your posts to this thread and
> Apache-mod_jk-memory-leak, and you didn't post the
> server.xml config for AJP/1.3 connector, neither the
> essential httpd.conf directives.
Here are connection-related directives from the the httpd.conf we have been
us
Hmm, this might be a good reason to upgrade to Apache 2.2.x then. Currently,
the mod_jk 1.2.20 in conjunction with Apache 2.0.59 is not suitable for a
production system running Windows 2003, and unfortunately we don't have
sysadmins for Linux or Unix, hence I am stuck with Windows 2003 as the
serv
You may want to implement your own HTTPSessionListener for your servlet. It
looks something like this:
package mypackage;
import javax.servlet.http.HttpSessionListener;
import javax.servlet.http.HttpSessionEvent;
public class SessionListener implements HttpSessionListener {
static int
Is there another connector software available between Apache 2.0.59 and
Tomcat 5.5.17 on Windows 2003 which is more stable and suitable for a live
web service? mod_jk 1.2.20 (which I believe is the latest version) appears
to have some problems with managing TCP connections (see
http://www.nabble.c
> My client has observed connections to the webapp on this Apache Tomcat
> server building up and not timing out but I can't see why this is.
Just curious: How exactly has he observed the connections building up over
the time? What does the /manager/status report for the ajp-8009 say?
(Current t
Hello Chris,
> Check to see if these sessions ever go away. There is a bug in TC 5.5 up
> to and including 5.5.20 (could be 5.0 as well, I'm not sure) where
> sessions can live forever under load. If you are load testing to check
> out the memory usage, you might be triggering this bug where sess
BTW: Tomcat (which is still running and which I can access via port 8080)
claims this in its manager status report:
Max threads: 40 Min spare threads: 0 Max spare threads: 0 Current thread
count: 14 Current thread busy: 1 Keeped alive sockets count: 0
Max processing time: 3109 ms Processing time:
I have just managed to repeat the error. 2 of us, from 2 different
workstations, hammered our website for a minute, by rapidly clicking on
links within the same site before it ended up always responding with a
standard Error 503 (Service unavailable) coming from the Apache frontend. I
checked all
> > Yes, it starts out with a much smaller memory, around 10 to 15 MB or so,
> > even after a few initial connections to Tomcat from one user session.
> >
> I see, any idea, how the delta 70-15=55MB relates to connections (if you
> do stress tests with real parallelity e.g. 20, 50, 100, 200, how
> It closes the connections, but it doesn't release all objects related to
> the corresponding cache slot. Somehow I have the feeling, that it's not
> really worth optimizing this, because 70MB for a web server doesn't
> sound that much relative to hardware sizes of the last years. I assume
>
I have completed some stresstests (with up to 500 concurrent users) on Apache
2.0.59, mod_jk 2.1.20, Tomcat 5.5.17, using the following
workers.properties:
<<<
# Define 1 real worker using ajp13
worker.list=ajp13
# Set properties for worker1 (ajp13)
worker.ajp13.type=ajp13
worker.ajp13.host=loca
> By default apache will use as max number of connections the same value,
> as the max number of threads, so that each thread can get it's own
> connection. By default it will shrink the connection pool down to half
> of the max size. There is a min value you can configure if this doesn't
> fi
Yesterday, I indeed upgraded another server box to Apache 2.0.59, mod_jk
1.2.20, Tomcat 5.5.17, and also set the connection_pool_timeout=600 (is that
value 600 seconds, or milliseconds?). I then subjected this server to a
brief stresstest (roughly 50 simultanious HTTP sessions on Tomcat's end) and
We are running an Apache 2.0.54 , mod_jk 1.2.10 and Tomcat 5.5.17 on a
Windows 2003 server box, average web traffic to Tomcat is about 10 to 20
concurrent HTTP sessions (idle session timeout 15 minutes). After a weekend
of sudden heavy web traffic with up to 150 simultaneous HTTP sessions we
exper
28 matches
Mail list logo
